Amir H Lebastchi1, Arvin K George2, Thomas J Polascik3, Jonathan Coleman4, Jean de la Rosette5, Baris Turkbey6, Bradford J Wood7, Michael A Gorin8, Abhinav Sidana9, Sangeet Ghai10, Kae Jack Tay11, John F Ward12, Rafael Sanchez-Salas13, Berrend G Muller14, Bernard Malavaud15, Pierre Mozer16, Sebastien Crouzet17, Peter L Choyke6, Osamu Ukimura18, Ardeshir R Rastinehad19, Peter A Pinto20. 1. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA. 2. University of Michigan, Department of Urology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 5. Department of Urology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey. 6. Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA. 7. Center for Interventional Oncology, Clinical Center, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA. 8. The James Buchanan Brady Urologic Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 9. Division of Urology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA. 10. Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network-Mount Sinai Hospital-Women's College Hospital, University of Toronto, ON, Canada. 11. Department of Urology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore. 12. Division of Surgery, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, University of Texas, Houston, TX, USA. 13. Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. 14. Department of Urology, AMC University Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 15. Toulouse Cancer Institute, Toulouse, France. 16. Academic Department of Urology, AP-HP, Hopital Pitié-Salpétrière, Paris, France. 17. Department of Urology, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Université de Lyon, Lyon, France. 18. Department of Urology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan. 19. Department of Interventional Radiology, Mount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, USA. 20. Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA. Electronic address: pintop@mail.nih.gov.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Focal therapy (FT) and partial gland ablation (PGA) are quickly adopted by urologists and radiologists as an option for the management of localized prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To find consensus on a standardized nomenclature and to define a follow-up guideline after FT and PGA for localized prostate cancer in clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A review of the literature identified controversial topics in the field of FT. Online questionnaires were distributed to experts during three rounds, with the goal to achieve consensus on debated topics. The consensus project was concluded with a face-to-face meeting in which final conclusions were formulated. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Controlled feedback of responses of previous rounds were summarized and returned to the participants allowing them to re-evaluate their decisions. The level of agreement to achieve consensus on a topic was set at 80%. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Sixty-five experts participated in this interdisciplinary consensus study (72% urologists; 28% radiologists). The experts propose the use of the herein standardized nomenclature for ablative procedures. After FT/PGA, the following tests should be performed to assess treatment outcomes: prostate-specific antigen (PSA), imaging, biopsies, and functional outcome assessment. Although not a reliable marker for treatment failure, PSA should be measured every 3 mo in the 1st year and every 6 mo thereafter. Magnetic resonance imaging is the preferred image modality and should be performed at 6 and 18 mo after treatment. A systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy combined with a targeted biopsy of the treated area should be performed 6-12 mo after treatment. Functional outcomes should be obtained 3-6 mo after treatment for the first time and until stability is attained. CONCLUSIONS: The panel recommends the use of the proposed nomenclature and follow-up protocols to generate reliable data supporting a broader implementation of FT as a standard of care for select patients with localized prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we present expert opinion on the use of a standardized nomenclature, and surveillance methodologies after focal therapy and partial gland ablation for localized prostate cancer.
BACKGROUND: Focal therapy (FT) and partial gland ablation (PGA) are quickly adopted by urologists and radiologists as an option for the management of localized prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To find consensus on a standardized nomenclature and to define a follow-up guideline after FT and PGA for localized prostate cancer in clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A review of the literature identified controversial topics in the field of FT. Online questionnaires were distributed to experts during three rounds, with the goal to achieve consensus on debated topics. The consensus project was concluded with a face-to-face meeting in which final conclusions were formulated. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Controlled feedback of responses of previous rounds were summarized and returned to the participants allowing them to re-evaluate their decisions. The level of agreement to achieve consensus on a topic was set at 80%. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Sixty-five experts participated in this interdisciplinary consensus study (72% urologists; 28% radiologists). The experts propose the use of the herein standardized nomenclature for ablative procedures. After FT/PGA, the following tests should be performed to assess treatment outcomes: prostate-specific antigen (PSA), imaging, biopsies, and functional outcome assessment. Although not a reliable marker for treatment failure, PSA should be measured every 3 mo in the 1st year and every 6 mo thereafter. Magnetic resonance imaging is the preferred image modality and should be performed at 6 and 18 mo after treatment. A systematic 12-core transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy combined with a targeted biopsy of the treated area should be performed 6-12 mo after treatment. Functional outcomes should be obtained 3-6 mo after treatment for the first time and until stability is attained. CONCLUSIONS: The panel recommends the use of the proposed nomenclature and follow-up protocols to generate reliable data supporting a broader implementation of FT as a standard of care for select patients with localized prostate cancer. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we present expert opinion on the use of a standardized nomenclature, and surveillance methodologies after focal therapy and partial gland ablation for localized prostate cancer.
Authors: K J Tay; M J Scheltema; H U Ahmed; E Barret; J A Coleman; J Dominguez-Escrig; S Ghai; J Huang; J S Jones; L H Klotz; C N Robertson; R Sanchez-Salas; S Scionti; A Sivaraman; J de la Rosette; T J Polascik Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2017-03-28 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Kae Jack Tay; Mahul B Amin; Sangeet Ghai; Rafael E Jimenez; James G Kench; Laurence Klotz; Rodolfo Montironi; Satoru Muto; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Baris Turkbey; Arnauld Villers; Thomas J Polascik Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-06-09 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Berrend G Muller; Willemien van den Bos; Maurizio Brausi; Francois Cornud; Paolo Gontero; Alexander Kirkham; Peter A Pinto; Thomas J Polascik; Ardeshir R Rastinehad; Theo M de Reijke; Jean J de la Rosette; Osamu Ukimura; Arnauld Villers; Jochen Walz; Hessel Wijkstra; Michael Marberger Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-08-16 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Matthijs J Scheltema; John I Chang; Maret Böhm; Willemien van den Bos; Alexandar Blazevski; Ilan Gielchinsky; Anton M F Kalsbeek; Pim J van Leeuwen; Tuan V Nguyen; Theo M de Reijke; Amila R Siriwardana; James E Thompson; Jean J de la Rosette; Phillip D Stricker Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-03-28 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Massimo Valerio; Hashim U Ahmed; Mark Emberton; Nathan Lawrentschuk; Massimo Lazzeri; Rodolfo Montironi; Paul L Nguyen; John Trachtenberg; Thomas J Polascik Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-06-06 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jean J M C H de la Rosette; Rafael Sanchez Salas; Art Rastinehad; Thomas J Polascik Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-03-02 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Alex Z Wang; Amir H Lebastchi; Luke P O'Connor; Michael Ahdoot; Sherif Mehralivand; Nitin Yerram; Samir S Taneja; Arvin K George; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; John F Ward; Pilar Laguna; Jean de la Rosette; Peter A Pinto Journal: World J Urol Date: 2021-01-02 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: John R Heard; Aurash Naser-Tavakolian; Michael Nazmifar; Michael Ahdoot Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2022-03-04 Impact factor: 5.455
Authors: Luke P O'Connor; Shayann Ramedani; Michael Daneshvar; Arvin K George; Andre Luis Abreu; Giovanni E Cacciamani; Amir H Lebastchi Journal: Asian J Urol Date: 2021-05-03
Authors: Mark Paxton; Eitan Barbalat; Nathan Perlis; Ravi J Menezes; Mark Gertner; David Dragas; Masoom A Haider; Antonio Finelli; John Trachtenberg; Sangeet Ghai Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Arnas Rakauskas; Giancarlo Marra; Isabel Heidegger; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Alexander Kretschmer; Fabio Zattoni; Felix Preisser; Derya Tilki; Igor Tsaur; Roderick van den Bergh; Claudia Kesch; Francesco Ceci; Christian Fankhauser; Giorgio Gandaglia; Massimo Valerio Journal: Front Surg Date: 2021-07-12